Orr Vs Gretzky

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Back to the topic at hand: It seems that the majority of posters in this thread are not old enough to have seen Orr play in the 1970s. There are several posters, though, who did see both players play, and as far as I can tell, they all think Orr was better.

So a question: Anyone around here actually see all or the majority of Orr's career (and then I assume all of Gretzky's) who thinks Gretzky was better?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Wayne Gretzky

Previously I had commented about Bobby Orr being equally effective from every part of the ice. This would include the the defensive or neutral ice areas.

Wayne Gretzky was one of the other players who could dominate from all parts of the offensive and neutral zones of the ice even though his skating was not as powerful as Bobby Orr's.L/C/R did not matter to either player.

 

[popculturereference]

The reason he couldn't beat the Canadians was their goalie, the best clutch goalie I ever saw, Ken Dryden, and it wasn't his goals against average, a very overrated stat, it is making the plays when they are needed. The b's totally outplayed them, and just couldn't put it by him. goaltending, the most important position in hockey.

Regardless of what you say, almost everyone who saw both, played with or against both, all say the believe Orr was the best ever, not gretzky.

Orr made a terrible Bruin team better his rookie year, and He always made his team better. He was not a Michael Jordan who did not, and when he played with the Wizards, he was still athletically better than most but didn't know the game well enough. If Bird played in his body, the Wizards would at least have been a playoff contender. and Orr was that way, even on one knee, always made his team better, a great team player he was.

Thanks for pointing out the '71 series was because of Dryden. I knew that. I was just saying that it's insane that you would point out Gretzky couldn't win a Cup after he left the Oilers, while Orr couldn't even get his teams to win more then two.

Also, you are making a very broad statement by saying that "almost" (nice use of this word, it saves yourself from me using a few dissenters) everyone that saw both says Orr was better then Gretzky. Really? Then why was the tally so close in the Hockey News' Greatest Player poll in 1998? I don't understand why it's so inconceivable to you that some people prefer Gretzky.

And, why bring Jordan into the discussion? Especially considering that Jordan is seen as the number one player of all-time (with only Boston homers picking Russell). Bird would probably be five or six, and he isn't even the best of his era -- Magic is (although it's incredibly close). Do you even watch the NBA? At 38, Jordan was back to being a mere mortal, and his best teammate was Rip Hamilton or Stackhouse. Looking at their roster, I am surprised they even had 37 wins in both seasons.

Can you even make an argument that's not based on a hypothetical?

 

[canucks4ever]

^ Larry bird only gets ranked 5th or 6th by biased people that saw him play when they were 12. Tim Duncan has clearly surpassed larry bird, won more championships with less talent around him and far better defensively.

 

[popculturereference]

^ Larry bird only gets ranked 5th or 6th by biased people that saw him play when they were 12. Tim Duncan has clearly surpassed larry bird, won more championships with less talent around him and far better defensively.

I don't really want to begin a derail, but I'd be interested to see what your top ten NBA players are. I don't really have mine ranked, but other then Jordan first, and Russell second, I have: Bird, Johnson, Abdul-Jabbar, Bryant, Duncan, Olajuwon, Chamberlain, and, I don't know -- Robertson? O'Neal? Lebron probably makes this list in five years.

 

[canucks4ever]

I don't really want to begin a derail, but I'd be interested to see what your top ten NBA players are. I don't really have mine ranked, but other then Jordan first, and Russell second, I have: Bird, Johnson, Abdul-Jabbar, Bryant, Duncan, Olajuwon, Chamberlain, and, I don't know -- Robertson? O'Neal? Lebron probably makes this list in five years.

jordan
jabbar
russell
chamberlain
magic
shaq
duncan
kobe
bird
karl malone

Before you say olajuwon is better than malone, just remember that oajuwon won his 2 rings the year jordan sat out. Malone was top 5 in mvp voting 5 times, hakeem only twice, malone was 1st team all nba 11 times, hakeem only 6 times. Malone had the better career.

 

[Scott1980]

The reason he couldn't beat the Canadians was their goalie, the best clutch goalie I ever saw, Ken Dryden, and it wasn't his goals against average, a very overrated stat, it is making the plays when they are needed. The b's totally outplayed them, and just couldn't put it by him. goaltending, the most important position in hockey.

Regardless of what you say, almost everyone who saw both, played with or against both, all say the believe Orr was the best ever, not gretzky.

Orr made a terrible Bruin team better his rookie year, and He always made his team better. He was not a Michael Jordan who did not, and when he played with the Wizards, he was still athletically better than most but didn't know the game well enough. If Bird played in his body, the Wizards would at least have been a playoff contender. and Orr was that way, even on one knee, always made his team better, a great team player he was.

To be fair, I believe Gretzky was denied at least 3 Stanley Cups due to goaltending.

1983, Bill Smith, wow, that was some of the best goaltending I've ever seen. Then Vernon in 1986 was unreal. Gretzky didn't win in '93 with the Kings because of a goalie named Roy.

So actually, Gretzky could have won 7 Stanley Cups, easily, if not for goaltending!

1983








Jordan >>>>>> Bird. Remember game 2 of the 1986 first round playoffs? 63 points for a young man named Jordan against the grooved and experienced Bird. The Celtics won it all that year at lost one game TOTAL at home that season. Walton, Parrish, Johnson, McHale = HOF. George Gervin was in his last season. Other than that, no HOF on that Bulls team except His Airness!

 

[Trottier]

1983, Bill Smith, wow, that was some of the best goaltending I've ever seen.

Wow, thanks for posting those highlights.

The question often comes up here as to the best hockey game one ever watched. And my answer is always:

Game One, SCF, 1983.

Those clips bring back some great memories.

PS - Check out Messier's mid-ice cross check to the mouth of Tomas Jonsson at 5:50 of the 1st clip. In today's kinder and gentler NHL, that would have gotten #11 a multi-game suspension.

 

[Scott1980]

My pleasure. Got my pic with Bossy and Potvin a few years ago. Class acts both of them.

You didn't know about these clips? I got an Islander friend that glossed all over them when I showed it to him!

The next year, alas. That game one of '84 was just as good. Then came game 4.

Sutter got cancelled out by the Oilers defence, and then Semenko got the puck to Gretzky and...

 

[Rhiessan71]

Wow, thanks for posting those highlights.

The question often comes up here as to the best hockey game one ever watched. And my answer is always:

Game One, SCF, 1983.

Those clips bring back some great memories.

PS - Check out Messier's mid-ice cross check to the mouth of Tomas Jonsson at 5:50 of the 1st clip. In today's kinder and gentler NHL, that would have gotten #11 a multi-game suspension.

Heh, that's nothing, try and find some video of what Messier did to Linden. Talk about dirty, bush league crap.
The younger folk really don't understand how dirty Messier really was or for that matter, how nasty the league was even just 20 years ago.

Like what Cormier did is something Messier would do about once a season, seriously.

 

[bleeney]

Previously I had commented about Bobby Orr being equally effective from every part of the ice. This would include the the defensive or neutral ice areas.

Wayne Gretzky was one of the other players who could dominate from all parts of the offensive and neutral zones of the ice even though his skating was not as powerful as Bobby Orr's.L/C/R did not matter to either player.

It's interesting that you didn't mention Gretzky dominating the defensive zone. He didn't really have much of an impact in the defensive zone.

Everybody always points out Gretzky's offensive numbers, but they seldom point out the fact that he was on the ice for more goals against than any other player in history: 2285

Let's compare Orr and Gretzky re total goals for vs total goals against

Gretzky: 1487 games, 3520 TGF, 2285 TGA
Orr: 596 games, 1651 TGF, 781 TGA
*note: Orr's rookie year not included; stats not available until 67-68

Gretzky was on the ice for 1.540 goals scored for every goal against.
Orr was on the ice for 2.114 goals scored for every goal against.

That is a significant difference, and it doesn't even take into consideration Orr's shutdown role. Both Orr and Gretzky were the go-to guys when a goal was needed, and they led their powerplays. But Orr was also the top shutdown Dman for the Bruins. He usually stayed on the ice for the entire two minutes of every PK, and was always matched up against the other team's top shooters. Always. The same can't be said about Gretzky. If anything, that should inflate Orr's TGA. Didn't happen.

Orr dominated every aspect of the game, in any situation, on any part of the ice. His overall impact on the game was simply larger than Gretzky's.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Gretzky's Oilers were just as far out in front of everyone else as Orr's early 70's Bruins were, more so to be honest. The Oilers didn't have the kind of competition that the Bruins had in the Habs and Flyers.

I was talking about offense and no they weren't. The gap between them and the next best teams in the league wasn't nearly as big as it was in the 70s for the B's and Habs especially.

 

[Rhiessan71]

It's interesting that you didn't mention Gretzky dominating the defensive zone. He didn't really have much of an impact in the defensive zone.

Everybody always points out Gretzky's offensive numbers, but they seldom point out the fact that he was on the ice for more goals against than any other player in history: 2285

Let's compare Orr and Gretzky re total goals for vs total goals against

Gretzky: 1487 games, 3520 TGF, 2285 TGA
Orr: 596 games, 1651 TGF, 781 TGA
*note: Orr's rookie year not included; stats not available until 67-68

Gretzky was on the ice for 1.540 goals scored for every goal against.
Orr was on the ice for 2.114 goals scored for every goal against.

That is a significant difference, and it doesn't even take into consideration Orr's shutdown role. Both Orr and Gretzky were the go-to guys when a goal was needed, and they led their powerplays. But Orr was also the top shutdown Dman for the Bruins. He usually stayed on the ice for the entire two minutes of every PK, and was always matched up against the other team's top shooters. Always. The same can't be said about Gretzky. If anything, that should inflate Orr's TGA. Didn't happen.

Orr dominated every aspect of the game, in any situation, on any part of the ice. His overall impact on the game was simply larger than Gretzky's.

Should also be mentioned that while Gretzky obviously took scoring to another level, he didn't completely revolutionize and turn the game on its' ear like Orr did.

....and before people start saying how Gretzky playing behind the net was revolutionary, you should know that Gretzky himself said he started doing it after watching Bobby Clarke do it first.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I was talking about offense and no they weren't. The gap between them and the next best teams in the league wasn't nearly as big as it was in the 70s for the B's and Habs especially.

Again in '86, Gretzky's best season...
Oilers 426 GF!!!
Next closest, Calgary 354
League average was around 300 and almost a 1/3 of the league, 6 teams, didn't even break 300GF

EDIT: While the gap in 70/71 was pretty big for the Bruins, how do you explain Orr only getting 4 less points in 74/75 and the Bruins were only the 3rd highest scoring team in the league.

 

[BraveCanadian]

The hockey pendulum effect is common throughout the history of hockey.

Between 1960 and 1967 hockey saw two major offensive changes. The slapshot and the rushing defensemen - Bobby Orr. Both changed the way defense was played. By the late 1970's the defenses and goaltending had caught up strategically and technically so you did not see the high scoring numbers generated in the early 1970's.

The eighties changed this as first Wayne Gretzky then Mario Lemieux brought the perimeter into the offense, soon imitated by others. Scoring went up but then the defenses and goaltenders adapted and scoring dropped again.

If people are interested I can trace this trend back in time.

Great point because I think you just nailed it. I've been saying for quite a while that these teams were so good that the average didn't apply to them and you just articulated what I mean.

The teams like the early-mid 70s Bruins and the mid-late 70s Habs were outliers.

People keep leaning on this average scoring crutch.. but you can't ignore the fact that these teams at their peaks were scoring in the neighbourhood of 5 goals for each game.. while at the same time being great defensively.

They simply were not having a hard time scoring.. it is in black and white.

And the good point that you have made is that they were genuinely ahead of the curve in some way vs. the competition at the time.

Well put.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It's interesting that you didn't mention Gretzky dominating the defensive zone. He didn't really have much of an impact in the defensive zone.

Everybody always points out Gretzky's offensive numbers, but they seldom point out the fact that he was on the ice for more goals against than any other player in history: 2285

Let's compare Orr and Gretzky re total goals for vs total goals against

Gretzky: 1487 games, 3520 TGF, 2285 TGA
Orr: 596 games, 1651 TGF, 781 TGA
*note: Orr's rookie year not included; stats not available until 67-68

Gretzky was on the ice for 1.540 goals scored for every goal against.
Orr was on the ice for 2.114 goals scored for every goal against.

That is a significant difference, and it doesn't even take into consideration Orr's shutdown role. Both Orr and Gretzky were the go-to guys when a goal was needed, and they led their powerplays. But Orr was also the top shutdown Dman for the Bruins. He usually stayed on the ice for the entire two minutes of every PK, and was always matched up against the other team's top shooters. Always. The same can't be said about Gretzky. If anything, that should inflate Orr's TGA. Didn't happen.

Orr dominated every aspect of the game, in any situation, on any part of the ice. His overall impact on the game was simply larger than Gretzky's.

This is a horrendous comparison and a perfect example of why comparing stats per game over an entire career doesn't work.

Bobby Orr's entire season was his prime. Orr played for 8 years. Gretzky for 18. Gretzky was a shell of his former self for at least the last 5 years of his career. You want to make it a fair comparison? Compare Gretzky's first 8 years with Orr's 8 years. Orr might still come out ahead, but I'm sure it will be a lot closer.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Again in '86, Gretzky's best season...
Oilers 426 GF!!!
Next closest, Calgary 354
League average was around 300 and almost a 1/3 of the league, 6 teams, didn't even break 300GF

Yeah but the Oilers were 13th in defense and that is a 72 goal gap on offense.

Now go look at the 71 Bruins and 76-77 Habs.

Over 100 goal for gap between the Bruins and the second highest scoring team while being the 3rd best defensive team.

Habs have 64 goal lead on offense while simultaneously being the best defensive team in the league by 20 goals.

Those teams were much stronger vs. their competition those years than even the dynasty Oilers.. that is how overpowering they were.

 

[BraveCanadian]

This is a horrendous comparison and a perfect example of why comparing stats per game over an entire career doesn't work.

Bobby Orr's entire season was his prime. Orr played for 8 years. Gretzky for 18. Gretzky was a shell of his former self for at least the last 5 years of his career. You want to make it a fair comparison? Compare Gretzky's first 8 years with Orr's 8 years. Orr might still come out ahead, but I'm sure it will be a lot closer.

Yup this is penalizing Gretzky for staying healthly long enough to slow down and play for bad teams.

I believe Orr is still ahead when comparing apples to apples but the gap is closer.

The best part is it also drops one of Orr lowest scoring years too

 

[Rhiessan71]

This is a horrendous comparison and a perfect example of why comparing stats per game over an entire career doesn't work.

Bobby Orr's entire season was his prime. Orr played for 8 years. Gretzky for 18. Gretzky was a shell of his former self for at least the last 5 years of his career. You want to make it a fair comparison? Compare Gretzky's first 8 years with Orr's 8 years. Orr might still come out ahead, but I'm sure it will be a lot closer.

Actually those numbers are incorrect for Gretzky in that those are the numbers for his first 10 seasons in the league, not for his career.
Gretzky is not getting penalized at all with the 1.54.
His career ratio was actually 1.27 GF per 1GA.

 

[VMBM]

Sorry my friend, every one knew the only reason why we beat the Soviets was Orr, because only he could skate with them and better than them, even Hull himself said he was better and faster than them on one knee. And still the best player in hockey. Wow one guy says Perrault. i am talking about the players and almost if not all the writers.

Whatever there, 'friend'

The main reason why 'you' beat the Soviets was that the 1976 Team Canada was a helluva team full of superstars (the best team on paper ever in the eyes of many) and because the Soviets did not have their top line (Mikhailov-Petrov-Kharlamov) and not even their 2nd line (Shalimov-Shadrin-Yakushev).

Yeah, it was only Stastny who thought so, for the rest of the universe it was Orr. Sorry

 

[VMBM]

Back to the topic at hand: It seems that the majority of posters in this thread are not old enough to have seen Orr play in the 1970s. There are several posters, though, who did see both players play, and as far as I can tell, they all think Orr was better.

Not that I pretend to know other people's motives per se, but in some cases, it could be the fact that they were young when Orr was in his prime and thus there's a slight element of nostalgia involved (not taking ANYTHING away from Orr), whereas they were older and more cynical (?) and it wasn't the "good ol' NHL" anymore when Gretzky was playing.

Certainly almost all my favourite players are the ones that I saw in my childhood.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Not that I pretend to know other people's motives per se, but in some cases, it could be the fact that they were young when Orr was in his prime and thus there's a slight element of nostalgia involved (not taking ANYTHING away from Orr), whereas they were older and more cynical and it wasn't the "good ole NHL" anymore when Gretzky was playing.

Certainly almost all my favourite players are the ones that I saw in my childhood.

I definitely understand the feeling. I have a really hard time grasping the concept that Chris freaking Pronger could ever be as good as Scott Stevens.

 

[Briere Up There*]

Not that I pretend to know other people's motives per se, but in some cases, it could be the fact that they were young when Orr was in his prime and thus there's a slight element of nostalgia involved (not taking ANYTHING away from Orr), whereas they were older and more cynical (?) and it wasn't the "good ole NHL" anymore when Gretzky was playing.

Certainly almost all my favourite players are the ones that I saw in my childhood.

Or it could be the fact that he dominated offensively and defensively and they legitimately believe he was the greatest hockey player they ever saw.

Or maybe Orr is just some 70s Paul Coffey who beat up on the Seals and doesn't hold a candle to Gretzky...

For me he's the second best player ever.

 

[Merya]

I readily admit that in most ways Orr, Howe and others have been more "complete" players. Heck Neely and Lindros were more "complete" than Gretzky. Also they were flashier, like Ovechkin is at the moment. Orr had talent above those others by quite a margin ofc.

Still, while watching the above (recordings are nice, I was born in 72) is a thrill, and Orr is like the best action movie ever, watching Gretzky was otherwordly. It was unbelievable. I often thought he had no business doing what he did. It was like he lived few second in the future.

Orr bended the present to his will dominantly, fighting and showing the injuries for it. Gretzky lived in "bullet time" or whatever, dodged bullets and escaped usually unharmed.

Thats why I choose Gretzky, he's the only player I've ever seen that made me question my own perceptions.

** I knew I should save this post **

ps. Because I rank longevity and career higher than most, Orr is only number 3 on my list, after Gretzky and Howe.

 

[VMBM]

Or it could be the fact that he dominated offensively and defensively and they legitimately believe he was the greatest hockey player they ever saw.

Or maybe Orr is just some 70s Paul Coffey who beat up on the Seals and doesn't hold a candle to Gretzky...

For me he's the second best player ever.